Annoyed by All Those Drug Ads on TV?

Only two countries allow pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to patients – the United States and New Zealand. We see these direct-to-consumer (DTC) print and TV ads in the USA; in 2005 big pharma spent around $5 billion on them. As with other forms of advertising, the seller is convinced they are effective, saying: “We wouldn’t do it if it didn’t work”.

Now Canadian researchers have done a study suggesting that DTC is not effective. They published the results in the British Medical Journal. In Canada, DTC is illegal. However, many English-speaking areas of the country are fully exposed to American TV and radio, and, therefore, consumer drug ads. Quebec, on the other hand, is 80% French-speaking, and chiefly receive French-language TV and radio, so they are not exposed to DTC to the same extent. The researchers examined prescription rates for 3 drugs – Enbrel® (etanercept) for rheumatoid arthritis, Nasonex® (mometasone) for nasal allergies, and Zelnorm® (tegaserod) for irritable bowel syndrome or IBS – in English-speaking and French-speaking provinces.

Over a 5-year period, sales for Enbrel and Nasonex were the same in the English- and French-speaking provinces. Sales of Zelnorm did spike by 40% in English-speaking areas during the DTC campaign in the neighboring USA, but this was short-lived, and, after time, rates in both English- and French-speaking areas were the same.

Why doesn’t DTC work as well as the drug companies hope? The researchers suggest it’s because of the complexity of the process. A person sees an ad, is motivated, makes an appointment with the doctor, persuades the doctor to write a prescription, take it to a pharmacist and fills the prescription. Much more complex than other ads, where a decision to buy can usually be fulfilled almost immediately at the store. Perhaps the drug companies were wrong? And, with luck, they will cease this unpleasant practice? (Too much to hope, I guess.)